Science Research Gets More Engagement on Bluesky Than X, Study Finds
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
theguardian.comTechstory
skepticalmixed
Debate
70/100
BlueskyTwitter/xScience CommunicationSocial Media
Key topics
Bluesky
Twitter/x
Science Communication
Social Media
A study found that science research gets more engagement on Bluesky than X (formerly Twitter), sparking debate among commenters about the platforms' effectiveness and the nature of engagement.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
4m
Peak period
4
0-1h
Avg / period
2.1
Comment distribution15 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 15 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 1, 2025 at 9:48 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 1, 2025 at 9:52 AM EDT
4m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
4 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 1, 2025 at 6:20 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45092672Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 4:50:34 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
X might be a cesspit, but I would be more concerned about self-reinforcing "studies" being developed with and on Bluesky.
I can mute all words I don't like to see, and hit a bunch of "Not Relevant" once a month or so, and my X feed has only relevant content. And it has very high density.
I like the vibes of Fedi, but not enough density.
And Bluesky is just Old Twitter 2.0 without the density of technical stuff. That's the default feeling.
I can mute all words I don't like to see, and hit a bunch of "Not Relevant"s once a month or so, and my X feed has only relevant content. And it has very high density.
I like the vibes of Fedi, but there is not enough density.
And Bluesky is just Old Twitter 2.0 without the density of technical stuff. That's the default feeling.
In this note, Facebook algo perform the worst. No matter how much signal I send to the algorithm by watching videos for longer, liking, commenting on stuff of my liking, hitting "Not interested" a lot, it still shows me the lowest commonly understandable dumb thing again and again.
YouTube algo is also very trainable and enjoyable.
I don't like saying "on X".
When was masto-chump banned for so masto-tooting?
If you don't want Twitter/X because the owner makes you sick, I respect that but it's a different topic.
X downranks links in general, unfortunately, so unless the research is reformatted for X (rare) it won't get much engagement.
Bluesky now platform of choice for science community
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45039397
Scientists No Longer Find X Professionally Useful, and Have Switched to Bluesky
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44978815
So yeah entirely unsurprised that people aren’t engaging with science on X